TV SPORTS

TV SPORTS; All Rise! Tyson 'Appeals Court' Is in Session

By Richard Sandomir

Published: July 6, 1993

Our judicial system has it all wrong. All those sober courtrooms with their solemn protocol are too archaic for gossipy, fin de siecle America, where we can try people if we like on TV without abiding by the rules of evidence. We need squabbling experts, a divided audience, chatty jurors and an aggressive talk show host to make the courtroom experience entertaining and interactive.

That's what Montel Williams will bestow upon us Thursday at 5 P.M. (WNYW-Channel 5 in New York) when he exports an audience, four expert guests and bailiff Sally Jessy Raphael to a courtroom in Danville, Ind., (much applause here from the audience) to ask whether Mike Tyson deserves a new trial on his conviction of raping Desiree Washington.

A shaved-headed Tyson (there's no evidence that Williams lent him a razor) appears on tape, portions of which will be shown tonight at 5:50 and tomorrow at 7:50 P.M. on Showtime, for whom Williams works as a commentator on its pay-per-view boxing (which is controlled by Tyson's promoter, Don King).

Williams said the rare interview with the former heavyweight champion did not come via King, who said he couldn't deliver Tyson, but through the approval of the defense attorney Alan Dershowitz and Tyson, who watches Williams's show in the Indiana Youth Center rec room. It didn't hurt, either, that Viacom, which owns Showtime, distributes Williams's show -- connections he used to talk to King. But, Williams said, "I have no connection with Don King."

Some observations on the Montel Appeals Court:

*This seriously produced show (pronounced a monumental work of journalism by the county judge who lent Williams the courtroom) may turn off those daytime viewers more concerned with such fare as adults dressing in diapers, baby bonnets and rubber pants.

*There isn't much new here, as the issues surrounding a Tyson appeal are rehashed. These include whether the trial judge was biased because she was selected by the prosecutor; whether the testimony of three women who saw Tyson and Washington cuddling in a limo before the rape should have been allowed, and whether she perjured herself over whether she would pursue civil damages against Tyson.

*Guest Nathan Dershowitz, Alan's brother, is almost as contentious and loud as his famed sibling. Alan, amazingly enough, declined to appear on the show. Off camera during the Tyson taping, Williams said, Alan Dershowitz tried to goad a measured Tyson into "more adamant" characterizations of Washington.

*Tyson, current holder of the Louis D. Brandeis Chair of Judicial Ethics, believes a ruling like the one that excluded the testimony of the three women "hasn't happened in the history of courts." We knew he studied boxing films, but when did he start poring over Dan Quayle's used law books?

*Two of the jurors interviewed by Williams might have voted differently if the testimony of the three women had been ruled admissible -- but such evidence wouldn't have swayed two others. Williams's promise at the start of the show of "astonishing things" to be said by the jurors was enticing but inaccurate.

Williams encountered a small crisis of conscience near the show's end. Uncertain of the propriety of showing a taped interview with a former boyfriend of Washington's who she had claimed raped her years ago, Williams polled the show's four legal experts, who voted 3-1 against. Williams then vowed to air the interview at a later date if the public clamored for it.

"As the show evolved, it dawned on me if it was really right to show it," he said. "The guy signed a sworn affidavit, but she never filed a charge. When the panel said no, I said, 'Oh, oh,' now I have to justify the expense of sending the crew to talk to the guy. So I said if the public wants it, I'll show it. But I won't."

Good ruling. Showing it would be irresponsible. Wimbledon Notebook

Let us not yet anoint John McEnroe as the John Madden of tennis on the strength of his Wimbledon analysis. Yes, he's good. He spews out insights quickly, doesn't stumble over his words, possesses great vision, understands player motivation, spots nuances that lead the producer to the best replays and keeps Sir Bud Collins relatively tame. Now he needs to bring some of his on-court outrageousness and sardonic humor to his commentary. He needs to improve his reporting, too. On Sunday he assumed that men's champion Pete Sampras suffered from stomach cramps, which Sampras denied, and that Sampras was using his lucky United States Open towel, a fact McEnroe had not confirmed.

Collins's total of excited "whoos," "whoo-whoos," "wha-has," "ah-ha-ha-has" and "wows" was far higher during the women's final than the men's. Must be the same kind of hormonal imbalance that accounts for his strawberry and chili-pepper trouser selection. AIR WAVES

DICK ENBERG worked all of Sunday's Wimbledon matches after just having being informed of the death of Don Drysdale, his friend and former California Angels announcing partner. . . . Good use of player audio picked up some choice and emotional bon mots from finalist JIM COURIER.